Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33499220›Full record

ArticleGenes2021

Evaluation of DNA Extraction Methods Developed for Forensic and Ancient DNA Applications Using Bone Samples of Different Age.

Catarina Xavier, Mayra Eduardoff, Barbara Bertoglio, Christina Amory, Cordula Berger, Andrea Casas-Vargas, Johannes Pallua, Walther Parson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Catarina XavierInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-3522-1631
Mayra EduardoffInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0974-0609
Barbara BertoglioDepartment of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, Section of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, University of Pavia, 27100 Pavia, Italy.
Christina AmoryInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Cordula BergerInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Andrea Casas-VargasGrupo de Genética de Poblaciones e Identificación, Instituto de Genética, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá 11001, Colombia.
Johannes PalluaInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.
Walther ParsonInstitute of Legal Medicine, Medical University of Innsbruck, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-5692-2392

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The efficient extraction of DNA from challenging samples, such as bones, is critical for the success of downstream genotyping analysis in molecular genetic disciplines. Even though the ancient DNA community has developed several protocols targeting small DNA fragments that are typically present in decomposed or old specimens, only recently forensic geneticists have started to adopt those protocols. Here, we compare an ancient DNA extraction protocol (Dabney) with a bone extraction method (Loreille) typically used in forensics. Real-time quantitative PCR and forensically representative typing methods including fragment size analysis and sequencing were used to assess protocol performance. We used four bone samples of different age in replicates to study the effects of both extraction methods. Our results confirm Loreille's overall increased gain of DNA when enough tissue is available and Dabney's improved efficiency for retrieving shorter DNA fragments that is beneficial when highly degraded DNA is present. The results suggest that the choice of extraction method needs to be based on available sample, degradation state, and targeted genotyping method. We modified the Dabney protocol by pooling parallel lysates prior to purification to study gain and performance in single tube typing assays and found that up to six parallel lysates lead to an almost linear gain of extracted DNA. These data are promising for further forensic investigations as the adapted Dabney protocol combines increased sensitivity for degraded DNA with necessary total DNA amount for forensic applications.

Indexed as

Bone and BonesDNA, AncientAge Determination by SkeletonAge FactorsDNA, MitochondrialForensic GeneticsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMicrosatellite RepeatsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionSequence Analysis, DNADNA, AncientDNA, Mitochondrialbone DNA extractionDNA quantificationForenSeqIon S5 sequencingMiSeq FGxmtDNA sequencingSNP sequencingSTR typing and sequencingVISAGE Basic Tool

Identifiers

PMID33499220
PMCPMC7911526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.